How (Not) to Measure Loneliness: A Review of the Eight Most Commonly Used Scales

Loneliness affects well-being and has long-term negative impacts on physical and mental health, educational outcomes, and employability. Because of those current and long-term impacts, loneliness is a significant issue for which we need reliable and appropriate measurement scales. In the current pap...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:International journal of environmental research and public health 2022-08, Vol.19 (17), p.10816
Hauptverfasser: Maes, Marlies, Qualter, Pamela, Lodder, Gerine M A, Mund, Marcus
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue 17
container_start_page 10816
container_title International journal of environmental research and public health
container_volume 19
creator Maes, Marlies
Qualter, Pamela
Lodder, Gerine M A
Mund, Marcus
description Loneliness affects well-being and has long-term negative impacts on physical and mental health, educational outcomes, and employability. Because of those current and long-term impacts, loneliness is a significant issue for which we need reliable and appropriate measurement scales. In the current paper, psychometric properties of the eight most commonly used loneliness scales are reviewed both descriptively and meta-analytically. Results suggest that for many of the scales, the psychometric properties are promising. However, for some psychometric features, especially test-retest reliability and measurement invariance, evidence is rather scarce. Most striking, however, is the fact that all of the scales included items that do not measure loneliness. Surprisingly, for many (sub)scales, this was even the case for about half of the items. Because our measures are the foundation of our research work, it is crucial to improve the way loneliness is being measured.
doi_str_mv 10.3390/ijerph191710816
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_9518421</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2712852836</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c475t-7218627aea3723525078bb0bca71850fa07436ee93991564f121eb6f997048973</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkUtLxDAUhYMoPkbX7iTgRhejuUmbhwtBBl8wPlBnHdJ663RomzFpFf-9FXUYXd0L97uHcziE7AI7EsKw43KGYT4FAwqYBrlCNkFKNkwkg9WlfYNsxThjTOhEmnWyISRTOk3YJrm_8u_04Na3h7T19AZd7ALSsW-wKhuM8YSe0Qd8K_Gd-oK2U6Tn5cu0pTc-tnTk69o31QedRHymj7mrMG6TtcJVEXd-5oBMLs6fRlfD8d3l9ehsPMwTlbZDxUFLrhw6obhIedobyjKW5U6BTlnhmEqERDTCGEhlUgAHzGRhjGKJNkoMyOm37rzLanzOsWmDq-w8lLULH9a70v69NOXUvvg3a1LQCYde4OBHIPjXDmNr6zLmWFWuQd9FyxVwnXItZI_u_0NnvgtNH--LAm4ApOmp428qDz7GgMXCDDD71Zb911b_sbecYcH_1iM-Abeojqg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2711291169</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>How (Not) to Measure Loneliness: A Review of the Eight Most Commonly Used Scales</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>PubMed Central Open Access</source><source>MDPI - Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry</source><creator>Maes, Marlies ; Qualter, Pamela ; Lodder, Gerine M A ; Mund, Marcus</creator><creatorcontrib>Maes, Marlies ; Qualter, Pamela ; Lodder, Gerine M A ; Mund, Marcus</creatorcontrib><description>Loneliness affects well-being and has long-term negative impacts on physical and mental health, educational outcomes, and employability. Because of those current and long-term impacts, loneliness is a significant issue for which we need reliable and appropriate measurement scales. In the current paper, psychometric properties of the eight most commonly used loneliness scales are reviewed both descriptively and meta-analytically. Results suggest that for many of the scales, the psychometric properties are promising. However, for some psychometric features, especially test-retest reliability and measurement invariance, evidence is rather scarce. Most striking, however, is the fact that all of the scales included items that do not measure loneliness. Surprisingly, for many (sub)scales, this was even the case for about half of the items. Because our measures are the foundation of our research work, it is crucial to improve the way loneliness is being measured.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1660-4601</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1661-7827</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1660-4601</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.3390/ijerph191710816</identifier><identifier>PMID: 36078540</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Switzerland: MDPI AG</publisher><subject>Educational Status ; Loneliness ; Loneliness - psychology ; Mental health ; Meta-analysis ; Psychometrics ; Quantitative psychology ; Questionnaires ; Reproducibility of Results ; Review ; Surveys and Questionnaires</subject><ispartof>International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022-08, Vol.19 (17), p.10816</ispartof><rights>2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>2022 by the authors. 2022</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c475t-7218627aea3723525078bb0bca71850fa07436ee93991564f121eb6f997048973</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c475t-7218627aea3723525078bb0bca71850fa07436ee93991564f121eb6f997048973</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-1710-5728 ; 0000-0001-6114-3820 ; 0000-0003-0006-9043</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9518421/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9518421/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,315,728,781,785,886,27929,27930,53796,53798</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36078540$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Maes, Marlies</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Qualter, Pamela</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lodder, Gerine M A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mund, Marcus</creatorcontrib><title>How (Not) to Measure Loneliness: A Review of the Eight Most Commonly Used Scales</title><title>International journal of environmental research and public health</title><addtitle>Int J Environ Res Public Health</addtitle><description>Loneliness affects well-being and has long-term negative impacts on physical and mental health, educational outcomes, and employability. Because of those current and long-term impacts, loneliness is a significant issue for which we need reliable and appropriate measurement scales. In the current paper, psychometric properties of the eight most commonly used loneliness scales are reviewed both descriptively and meta-analytically. Results suggest that for many of the scales, the psychometric properties are promising. However, for some psychometric features, especially test-retest reliability and measurement invariance, evidence is rather scarce. Most striking, however, is the fact that all of the scales included items that do not measure loneliness. Surprisingly, for many (sub)scales, this was even the case for about half of the items. Because our measures are the foundation of our research work, it is crucial to improve the way loneliness is being measured.</description><subject>Educational Status</subject><subject>Loneliness</subject><subject>Loneliness - psychology</subject><subject>Mental health</subject><subject>Meta-analysis</subject><subject>Psychometrics</subject><subject>Quantitative psychology</subject><subject>Questionnaires</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><subject>Review</subject><subject>Surveys and Questionnaires</subject><issn>1660-4601</issn><issn>1661-7827</issn><issn>1660-4601</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><recordid>eNpdkUtLxDAUhYMoPkbX7iTgRhejuUmbhwtBBl8wPlBnHdJ663RomzFpFf-9FXUYXd0L97uHcziE7AI7EsKw43KGYT4FAwqYBrlCNkFKNkwkg9WlfYNsxThjTOhEmnWyISRTOk3YJrm_8u_04Na3h7T19AZd7ALSsW-wKhuM8YSe0Qd8K_Gd-oK2U6Tn5cu0pTc-tnTk69o31QedRHymj7mrMG6TtcJVEXd-5oBMLs6fRlfD8d3l9ehsPMwTlbZDxUFLrhw6obhIedobyjKW5U6BTlnhmEqERDTCGEhlUgAHzGRhjGKJNkoMyOm37rzLanzOsWmDq-w8lLULH9a70v69NOXUvvg3a1LQCYde4OBHIPjXDmNr6zLmWFWuQd9FyxVwnXItZI_u_0NnvgtNH--LAm4ApOmp428qDz7GgMXCDDD71Zb911b_sbecYcH_1iM-Abeojqg</recordid><startdate>20220830</startdate><enddate>20220830</enddate><creator>Maes, Marlies</creator><creator>Qualter, Pamela</creator><creator>Lodder, Gerine M A</creator><creator>Mund, Marcus</creator><general>MDPI AG</general><general>MDPI</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1710-5728</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6114-3820</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0006-9043</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20220830</creationdate><title>How (Not) to Measure Loneliness: A Review of the Eight Most Commonly Used Scales</title><author>Maes, Marlies ; Qualter, Pamela ; Lodder, Gerine M A ; Mund, Marcus</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c475t-7218627aea3723525078bb0bca71850fa07436ee93991564f121eb6f997048973</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Educational Status</topic><topic>Loneliness</topic><topic>Loneliness - psychology</topic><topic>Mental health</topic><topic>Meta-analysis</topic><topic>Psychometrics</topic><topic>Quantitative psychology</topic><topic>Questionnaires</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><topic>Review</topic><topic>Surveys and Questionnaires</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Maes, Marlies</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Qualter, Pamela</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lodder, Gerine M A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mund, Marcus</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Access via ProQuest (Open Access)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>International journal of environmental research and public health</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Maes, Marlies</au><au>Qualter, Pamela</au><au>Lodder, Gerine M A</au><au>Mund, Marcus</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>How (Not) to Measure Loneliness: A Review of the Eight Most Commonly Used Scales</atitle><jtitle>International journal of environmental research and public health</jtitle><addtitle>Int J Environ Res Public Health</addtitle><date>2022-08-30</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>19</volume><issue>17</issue><spage>10816</spage><pages>10816-</pages><issn>1660-4601</issn><issn>1661-7827</issn><eissn>1660-4601</eissn><abstract>Loneliness affects well-being and has long-term negative impacts on physical and mental health, educational outcomes, and employability. Because of those current and long-term impacts, loneliness is a significant issue for which we need reliable and appropriate measurement scales. In the current paper, psychometric properties of the eight most commonly used loneliness scales are reviewed both descriptively and meta-analytically. Results suggest that for many of the scales, the psychometric properties are promising. However, for some psychometric features, especially test-retest reliability and measurement invariance, evidence is rather scarce. Most striking, however, is the fact that all of the scales included items that do not measure loneliness. Surprisingly, for many (sub)scales, this was even the case for about half of the items. Because our measures are the foundation of our research work, it is crucial to improve the way loneliness is being measured.</abstract><cop>Switzerland</cop><pub>MDPI AG</pub><pmid>36078540</pmid><doi>10.3390/ijerph191710816</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1710-5728</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6114-3820</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0006-9043</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1660-4601
ispartof International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022-08, Vol.19 (17), p.10816
issn 1660-4601
1661-7827
1660-4601
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_9518421
source MEDLINE; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; PubMed Central Open Access; MDPI - Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute; PubMed Central; Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry
subjects Educational Status
Loneliness
Loneliness - psychology
Mental health
Meta-analysis
Psychometrics
Quantitative psychology
Questionnaires
Reproducibility of Results
Review
Surveys and Questionnaires
title How (Not) to Measure Loneliness: A Review of the Eight Most Commonly Used Scales
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-15T23%3A06%3A22IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=How%20(Not)%20to%20Measure%20Loneliness:%20A%20Review%20of%20the%20Eight%20Most%20Commonly%20Used%20Scales&rft.jtitle=International%20journal%20of%20environmental%20research%20and%20public%20health&rft.au=Maes,%20Marlies&rft.date=2022-08-30&rft.volume=19&rft.issue=17&rft.spage=10816&rft.pages=10816-&rft.issn=1660-4601&rft.eissn=1660-4601&rft_id=info:doi/10.3390/ijerph191710816&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2712852836%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2711291169&rft_id=info:pmid/36078540&rfr_iscdi=true